Diederik Meijer
Introduction: Natural Phenomena and Interpretation
Natural
phenomena
are
physical
processes.
Mentioning or
depicting them constitutes a snapshot where a film would be in
order: a single e t K~V, whereas the context as a whole would
really be needed to establish identification, working and
function. General and ubiqui tous concepts like "earthquake",
"rain", "moon" present little difficulty on the cognitive level,
but knowledge of the context in which they are used is necessary
if one wants to 'understand' them: the quod significatur is a
prerequisite for the quod significat. However, in Archaeology,
History and Philology the cultural b&ckground of an item, whether
artifact, "fact", picture or word, of ten has to be induced from
(our definition of)
the significant.
Perhaps
this
is
not
so
different in other sciences, such as physics, where an isolated
phenomenon also gives
rise
to
theories
about
the
underlying
principles and causes. In reconstructing and understanding
ancient societies or other cultural contexts different from our
own,
as
in other disciplines,
the
greatest
pi tfalls
lie
in
definition and in classification.
The attempted understanding can be of
several
kinds.
It can
pertain to formal aspects (the identification of an artifact as
a hand axe; asserting that Alexander the Great died in 323 B.C.;
the translation of Akkadian sarru as 'king'), or to functional
ones. In the latter case, utilitarian and symbolic function can
be distinguished.
If we understand iconography as the isolation, description
and interpretation of icons - understood in the widest sense of
the word -
all essays in this volume are iconographical.
For
instance, Orthmann's analysis of the Halawa paintings, Matthiae's
identification of the god Yam and van Loon's ideas on the rainbow
may be viewed as formal iconographical understanding (i.e. what
Panofsky calls pre-iconographic description). Van Driel' s account
D. Meijer
1
of the weather would classify as utili tarian-functional,
Wiggermann's paper as symbolic-functional understanding.
and
According to Panofsky, iconography is the explanation of figures,
stories and allegories. In the case of scientific endeavour, this
explanation is by way of words. Our language plays a paramount
role:
" ... the relationship between words and images reflects,
within
the
realm
of
representation,
signification,
and
communication, the relations we posit between symbols and the
world, signs and their meanings." 1 Since the languages used in
this volume, and those that yielded many of the concepts
discussed during the symposium (Sumerian, Akkadian and Hittite),
are very different or even not yet well-known, a consensus on any
of those relations might seem difficult to reach. However, on the
cognitive level, natural phenomena, both in verbal and pictorial
representation,
do admit of clear relations between sign and
meaning. One of the unchangeable facts of life for a hurr.an is
nature,
and
it
gives
rise
to
the
ubiquitous
convent ion that rain means wetness,
experience
and
that the moon rises
and
wanes, and that earthquakes leave one no place to feel safe in.
It is of course on the more abstract level of surpassed human
control that (especially symbolic) meaning or function is
attached to nature. Rain that is too abundant in terms of human
manageability should be
'explained away'.
Powers
called gods
apparently have reasons for their actions, and these reasons are
found in the shortcomings or sins of the not so powerful ones.
This
translation
of
cause
and
effect
into
powerful-
powerless, together with the subsequent attempts at appeasement
by the powerless, gave rise to the creation of humanity's own
"extra power": magic. In the minds of the powerless as a social
group, their leader should be able to mediate between them and
the powerful, whence the emphasis in the ancient Near East on the
qualities of a ruler as a civil, social and religious engineer.
In
the mind of
an
individual,
the mediation
is
assigned
to
'lower' divinities. In both cases, the intermediary has both
human and divine characteristics. Hence, also the mediation takes
lW.J.T. Mitchell, Iconology. Chicago 1986, p. 43.
2
Introduction
place in an extraordinary fashion. Both in words (e.g., prayers,
that have a formulary markedly different from ordinary speech,
giving them something
'magical') and in pictures (e.g.
in the
Çatal Hüyük hunting scenes to propitiate a successful outcome, or
simply in adoration scenes) man uses a special, magical set of
signs to address the 'magic' forces surrounding him.
The symbolism in which natural phenomena are clothed and the
magic used in addressing them become merged. The embodiment of
this merger is called mythologYi there is no mythology where
humans do not play at least some kind of role, and I think myths
can be seen as the stories resulting from the tension between
symbolized
natural
phenomena
and magical
attempts
by man
to
control them. Whereas the controlling is done in the myth, the
myth itself is an at tempt at explanation.
The phenomena to be explained seem clear and unequivocal,
but the explanations always entail elaboration and justification.
Perhaps this is the reason for the fact that so few actual rain
showers, lightning flashes, earthquakes or eclipses are mentioned
or depicted. Their greater importance lay in the meaning attached
to them (the symbolic function), in their perpetrators, and in
the surest way to counter them. This focus by the early artists
on the "meaning" of ten led to a stylization or short-hand vers ion
of the described phenomenon, while the pictorial emphasis lay on
the attached symbolism - always a cultural convent ion difficult
to fathom by those not belonging to that culture.
The essays in this volume are hoped to constitute one possible
way out of that quandary. Cultural relativism is en vogue, and
every
student
attacks
his
subject
matter
with
his
own
preconceived ideas, which are determined by his own culture. Yet,
it is by finding conventions and regularities within that subject
matter,
that
and by following their behaviour in their own context
we
try,
heuristically,
to
enter
into an
understanding:
Landsberger's program for a way out of the Eigenbegrifflichkeit.
It
would
seem
experienced
natural
that
by all
phenomena,
the
study
people
is
one
of
those
throughout
of
the
phenomena
their whole
promising
that
life,
avenues
are
i .e .
toward
understanding different cultures.
D. Meijer
3
The required distillation and understanding of
the
conventions used by the ancients, both in verbal and in pictorial
art, might be called 'iconology', and their application to
specific pieces of those arts, in analyzing and understanding
them, iconography. Thus, when the essays collected here are
iconographical in content, the volume itself may perhaps pave
part of the way towards an Iconology of the Ancient Near East.
4
Introduction